APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his Bad Conduct Discharge be upgraded to honorable (HD) or at least a general discharge/under honorable conditions (GD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he knows he made a mistake but believes he has paid the price many times over and that he is 58 years old, has no income, and he is in need of medical care.  The applicant has submitted three character references with his application, two from friends and one from his pastor, to attest to his post service good citizenship.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 October 1957 at age 19 for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and advanced individual training at Fort Knox, Kentucky.  Upon completion of his training he was awarded military occupation specialty (MOS) 111.00 (Infantryman) and assigned to an overseas tour of duty in Hawaii for his first permanent duty station.

The applicant’s record is void of information on any specific acts of achievement, valor or service warranting special recognition or commendation.  However, there is documented evidence of a record of disciplinary infractions.

On 20 October 1958 the applicant was tried by summary court-martial for violation of Article 121 (stealing) of the UCMJ. He was found guilty of the charge and sentenced to forfeit $25.00.

On 24 March 1959 the applicant was tried by summary court-martial for violation of Article 134 (uttering a bad check). He was found guilty and sentenced to forfeit $25 dollars.

On 20 July 1959 the applicant was tried by general court-martial for four specifications of violation of Article 123 (two specifications of forgery and two specifications of uttering bad checks).  He pleaded and was found guilty of all charges and specifications and was sentenced to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit $55.00 a month for 24 months, to be confined at hard labor for 24 months, and to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.

The court-martial was promulgated and the sentence approved in General Court-Martial Order Number 10, Headquarters, United States Army, Hawaii/25th Infantry Division, APO 957, San Francisco, California dated 13 August 1959; and ordered the applicant be confined in the US Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas pending completion of the appellate review.

General Court Martial Order Number 31, Headquarters, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas dated 11 January 1960 affirmed the court-martial and ordered the sentence be duly executed.  On 19 January 1960 the Office of the Judge Advocate General of the Army confirmed that the order accurately reflected the final action duly taken pursuant to appellate review.

Accordingly, on 16 February 1960 the applicant was issued a bad conduct discharge after completing 1 year, 9 months, and 4 days of active military service and accruing 212 days of time lost due to confinement.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

2.  While the Board has taken cognizance of the applicant's age, his medical problems, his employment problems, and his good post-service conduct; none of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrant the relief requested.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director